Rubber Schnib

I'm sure there has been one, just not caught on camera.

He was smacked round the mouth, fair enough for him to swan it up.

+1 here for the USA, listening to the game in work before heading out for a few bevvies.

Because game theory is a field of mathematics - if you want to invoke it to demonstrate that Graham should do something other than what he's best at, you need to show your workings. Game theory might just as easily show exactly the opposite of what you suggest - without showing the actual calculations, it doesn't mean anything. You've not shown this, though. There's no workings. You might as well say that set theory suggests Graham should play on the wing, with zero supporting calculations. Everybody suspects Graham will run hard and make top yards, and yet nobody seems to be able to do much about it. Hence the situations are not as different as you suggest. People are well aware of Graham's game, just as they are Cunningham's at close range. I have no doubt they (ineffectively) try to stop him doing it, just as they do Cunningham.

If you're going to invoke game theory, you should be showing your calculations at this point. People expect Cunningham to barrel over at close range - he's been doing it for years, and people are well aware of it. Nontheless, he still does it. There seems to be an assumption in your post that the opposition are unaware of Graham's strengths, and are somehow not trying to negate them in the first place. It also seems to assume that Graham will not adapt in tandem with the opposition. Bandying around terms like "game theory" may add a sheen of technicality to the post, but it's not helpful unless you're actually doing the maths and rigorously showing why he should not play to his strengths. It's like saying a winger shouldn't run fast, because doing so make the opposition try to shut them down - as if they weren't trying to do so in the first place. Extra attention on a single player can be a good thing in a team sport, as it creates more space for other people in the team.

I'm going to use that in future.

No, I wouldn't. Such things have quite probably happened in masonic circles, just as they have in members of private golf clubs and drinking establishments etc. I don't think that's a reason to discourage them from getting involved in RL and doing charity work, however. It'll be more like drinking a "dirty pint" or diving naked into a river from some bridge, knowing the people who frequent my apartment. Or eating one of those weird whole fried soft-shell crab sandwiches from Virginia, knowing the mrs. No, that's not a euphamism - they're like giant spider butties, with the legs dangling over the side of the bread.

I do agree with this - it's not any indictment of the likes of Graham, Westwood etc that Richards should win; the Wigan man has had a freakish season in the side that topped the table.

I'm probably more likely to heavily discriminate in favour of people who visit my apartment than random strangers. They're likely to be my friends, after all, or acquaintances through other friends who came along with them. So yes, I do discriminate in favour of similar apartmentinati - and also my family, membership of whom is hardly open to the general public. If they want their secret club where they wear funny clothes and prance about behind closed doors, then fine - just as with members only bars, golf clubs etc. I have no doubt plenty of nepotism exists in those places too, but I'm not about to object to them getting involved in RL and doing charity work.

In what way? My apartment isn't open to the general public, and I have no intention of detailing everything that takes place in it. Presumably, I'm not welcome in RL.

Strange you didn't accuse RR of propaganda after his post. Once again, do you object to the Gulf RL developments, or RL clubs which were originally linked to Catholic churches?

Probably because sport is a great way to engender communication and openness. Do you object to the RL developments in the Arab/Persian Gulf? There's no shortage of discriminatory and secretive behaviour there, either. The Catholic Church is hardly a beacon of historical tolerance and open governance, guess we'd better frown upon all the RL teams formed associated with Catholic churches etc. We're trying to be an open and non-discriminatory sport. If setting such an example can help others to behave in a similar manner, I see no reason we should not "welcome" them - doing so is not to automatically condone any historical transgressions etc.

It's an Illuminati plot!

The problem is, to get to 15k average you will likely need a hell of a lot of additional away support. I think the new ground will certainly boost the average, as locals take more of an interest, but expecting an extra 1k or something on the away support is a real stretch, even with the curiosity factor. I can see a solid 2k - 3k increase, but getting to 15k seems very ambitious. But that's slightly beside the point; I think with the additional finances St. Helens will likely have due to increased support (including corporate?) and not throwing money into keeping Knowsley Road open, they could really go to town with the future marketing and produce a steady increase in crowds over time.

I think this was my fave.